SG Efficiency

[linesrg]

Good Evening All,

At the request of people on the the current Kromrey thread I'm moving this discussion to a dedicated thread.

You all need to know I have built a significant number of rotor based and solid state SG devices. These have all been built to specifications as presented by JB.

Over the last 7 years I have been in contact with a significant number of people in a similar situation.

Thus I know an SG in itself is not an OU machine, I never believed it was. I know that Bedini charging of a lead acid battery is very efficient and that it enables you to actually extract the amount of energy the manufacturer claims for the battery.

My one simple question remains and I do wish Dambit and others would actually answer it truthfully and directly.

On average you can expect an SG to be about 40% efficient from energy required to drive it to energy extracted from the charged battery. This is not a figure plucked out of the sky but one determined from real live testing. These results are broadly confirmed by others.

Thus I ask this question here. Is there anybody who is prepared to demonstrate that they have a Bedini based system where they are powering a solid state or rotor based SG with say 100W of energy over say an hour and then extracting more than 100W of energy from the charged battery or batteries on completion?

It is a simple question requiring a very simple yes or no answer. As far as I'm aware nobody on any forum anywhere has ever made this claim.

Thus can somebody explain why Bedini has a such a significant following. people generally believe he has machies that deliver OU.

So far in what eleven EFTV DVD's he has failed to demonstrate any such result and after 7 years I have yet to hear of anybody achieving such a result.

I have been accused of being a sceptic by Rick F. - well with good reason. I don't make false claims about self-runners and post video's on You Tube or the like - I prefer to deal in hard facts.

Why don't more people come out and tell the truth about Bedini's devices?

Regards

Richard

Now we are being shown the Kromrey

[Hoppy]

Hi Richard

I have spent over two years trying in vain to validate John Bedini's claim that the SG energiser can under controlled load testing, produce more energy from the secondary battery than was input to the system from the primary power source. I have seen some claims of overunity where the measured energy from the energiser output into the charging battery is compared with the the energy discharged from the secondary battery under controlled test conditions. Doing the load test this way does produce what appears to be a gain from the secondary battery but I have found this to be due to the inability of normal meters to accurately measure the complex pulsed waveform being sent to the secondary battery. However, it is clearly the input energy which needs to measured against the controlled discharge from the secondary battery and when measured this way, I am aware of no claims of overunity. If there is anyone out there that can offer evidence of system overunity when load tested from front to back, I would be most interested to study their load testing method and procedure.

Hoppy

[patmac]

@linesrg

yeah, that is the point, but, I think JB ever says that SG machine is not OverUnity so I think JB has truly OU machines on his workshop but we need more info to replicate them. We can sure SG is strangely effcient in comparisson to normal electrics motors that point is true. You can see the normal SG bycicle rim wheel turning on about 180 rpm's drawing < 2 watts, that is efficiency for example my FAN on my room, has a normal AC induction motor and draw 0.2 amps X 120 volts = 60 Watts. if we built a SG with this amp drawing is a monster powerfull. On DVD JB show his big 8 monopole, drawing about 240 Watts, but my question is: how much mechanical horse power is producing this beast?.

Now the purposes ever is dismythify, I agree with you, but what is the myth?

Never on energenx somebody has officially told SG is a overunity machine...

Now if you read the FEG book JB seems to try convince us that Motor/Generator is a super OU machine, Bearden explain us that in the same way.

On FEG book you can see Bedini technology based on Coil + Transistor and magnets wheel is OU when you use three batteries and cap discharger, on that book he explains how the capacitor is a negative energy amplifier, but for some strange reason ever ever ever ever.... says capacitor or batteries develop his negative resistance property within many hours of operation.

Too explains how radiant spike can make oscillations on the battery when is verified with a oscilloscope > 20 Mhz, and tells ionic resonance on lead acid battery is on 1-6 mhz but is affected by capacitance effects on the battery.

Another factor is all about Bedini says: "COP is on the battery". That seems be demonstrated on DVD 2 with the pendulum as I said on Komrey thread.

Ok, to proove all about JB has hidden us look this page:

Welcome to Bedini Technology

On that page a complete system to supply a home is showed, how does it work? I don't know, but you can see a diagram flow with a capacitor like reservoir, negative resistence on lead acid battery is explained and a super big machine with many coils and wheels in series.

How does it work all this system?. To begin I would need a 40-60 mhz scope, to see if is possible identify the ion resonance oscilation. (See attach), if someone has scope can prooved?. it's very necessary study capacitors, how can be negistors by many hours operation?.

Bearden explains the process too, he says is necessary use microwave switching, this is very fast, 2.4Ghz, semiconductors can drive this?, I don't knwo high speed semiconductor only drive some milliamps. So to apply this speed oscillations is necessary use analog techonology. Bearden speak us about a man called Bill Nelson who built a system solid state to charge battery while power his load, OU is very high on with this technology called Battery Poppers.

I wait for your opinion....

Regards

[ashtweth]

Hi Rich et ALL.

We were thinking about a multi coil slave solid state device (as we have a lot of batteries to test) and will post here what the design is, this maybe could be used to test the best efficiency?. One big Trigger and then many solid state salves. However Guys i thought the SG was COP 1 .

Also we have a person in France testing the mechanical out put to the charge rate of Rick's Fan, i hope to send that to Rick/All soon.

Ash

[Hoppy]

@ Patmac

John Bedini has always made it clear that the SG motor itself is not OU and that the gain shows up in the secondary battery. The point myself and Richard are making is that we are not aware that anyone has achieved an overal system OU when load testing the secondary battery. John himself tells us that the SG itself is only 40 - 50% efficient in electrical terms. Until others can verify John Bedini's overal system OU claim by documenting their load test results and most importantly the method and procedure used to arrive at their results in a form that can be understood and used by other researchers to further verify the claim, it simply remains a claim.

I appreciate that some people have little interest in proving John Bedini's OU claim and simply enjoy building his devices and charging some batteries. That's fine and understandable but John is making a serious claim about the SG's capabilities when charging batteries and its also understandable that some people will question this claim in an in depth technical manner.

Hoppy

[Hoppy]

@ Patmac

John Bedini has always made it clear that the SG motor itself is not OU and that the gain shows up in the secondary battery. The point myself and Richard are making is that we are not aware that anyone has achieved overall system OU when load testing the secondary battery. John himself tells us that the SG itself is only 40 - 50% efficient in electrical terms. Until others can verify John Bedini's overal system OU claim by documenting their load test results and most importantly the method and procedure used to arrive at their results in a form that can be understood and used by other researchers to further verify the claim, it simply remains a claim.

I appreciate that some people have little interest in proving John Bedini's OU claim and simply enjoy building his devices and charging some batteries. That's fine and understandable but John is making a serious claim about the SG's capabilities when charging batteries and its also understandable that some people will question this claim in an in depth technical manner.

Hoppy

[Hoppy]

@ Patmac

John Bedini has always made it clear that the SG motor itself is not OU and that the gain shows up in the secondary battery. The point myself and Richard are making is that we are not aware that anyone has achieved overall system OU when load testing the secondary battery. John himself tells us that the SG itself is only 40 - 50% efficient in electrical terms. Until others can verify John Bedini's overal system OU claim by documenting their load test results and most importantly the method and procedure used to arrive at their results in a form that can be understood and used by other researchers to further verify the claim, it simply remains a claim.

I appreciate that some people have little interest in proving John Bedini's OU claim and simply enjoy building his devices and charging some batteries. That's fine and understandable but John is making a serious claim about the SG's capabilities when charging batteries so its also understandable that some people will question this claim in an in depth technical manner.

Hoppy

[Mark]

I have brought back to life many car batteries and have a sg that runs on very little input and all of that is great. But I got into this free energy device building to make a machine that would charge 9 batteries from the input of 1 like was shown on the icehouse web site or build a self runner. Unfortunetly I have yet to make a 1 to 1 charger or self runner. I do believe it is possible but not with the information that we have. I hope that ALL the information that is need to do either will be available soon! Or that someone will figure it out and share it with the rest of us.

So I say good luck to all and keep up the hard work. I try to look at all this as a fun and exciting hobbie and try not to get my hopes up too high and keep on learning.

Mark

[patmac]

@Hoppy

Yes, SG is not OU that is clear, but when you read FEG book you can see Motor/Generator is OU, on DVD Energy From The Vacuum Part 2, you can see Pendulum is OU and Bearden on his tech papers says us with propers conditions a Radiant Energy charger is high OU. I think JB no speaks about because many of this chargers and dangers, need conditions controlled to avoid batteries explode. You're right Bedini ever speaks about NEGATIVE RESISTENCE EFFECT, and Bearden has a scientific investigation about that but how replicate it ?

That is my point, how can we replicate negative resistence effect on the battery, appearently Deep Cycle batteries is highly recommended, I made a test on motorcycle SLI batteries and is true, this battery has plates very near each other, then bubbles don't go up. I made this test with CAP removed and to watch the plates permanently.

Many anothers forum members seems has named this effect Battery Conditionning, and comment Radiant Charger SG, Solid State etc, may able charge a conditioned battery very fast. I think this only occurs when battery is sulphated, appearently Bedini explains negative resistence effect is prooved when you put a load on the battery you can see a strange effect where battery voltage go down but in certain momment go up again, this energy seems to be for free. I made this test two times with 5aH battery and 3 Watts bulb and yes this effect occurs battery voltage stabilizes with the bulb on 11.86 volts and go down to 11.82 in 15 minutes, and I've seen how voltage go to 11.86 again this test. But I can't extract more energy than I used to charge this battery.

[Hoppy]

@Hoppy

Yes, SG is not OU that is clear, but when you read FEG book you can see Motor/Generator is OU, on DVD Energy From The Vacuum Part 2, you can see Pendulum is OU and Bearden on his tech papers says us with propers conditions a Radiant Energy charger is high OU. I think JB no speaks about because many of this chargers and dangers, need conditions controlled to avoid batteries explode. You're right Bedini ever speaks about NEGATIVE RESISTENCE EFFECT, and Bearden has a scientific investigation about that but how replicate it ?

That is my point, how can we replicate negative resistence effect on the battery, appearently Deep Cycle batteries is highly recommended, I made a test on motorcycle SLI batteries and is true, this battery has plates very near each other, then bubbles don't go up. I made this test with CAP removed and to watch the plates permanently.

Many anothers forum members seems has named this effect Battery Conditionning, and comment Radiant Charger SG, Solid State etc, may able charge a conditioned battery very fast. I think this only occurs when battery is sulphated, appearently Bedini explains negative resistence effect is prooved when you put a load on the battery you can see a strange effect where battery voltage go down but in certain momment go up again, this energy seems to be for free. I made this test two times with 5aH battery and 3 Watts bulb and yes this effect occurs battery voltage stabilizes with the bulb on 11.86 volts and go down to 11.82 in 15 minutes, and I've seen how voltage go to 11.86 again this test. But I can't extract more energy than I used to charge this battery.

The rise in battery terminal voltage under load is more pronounced when a battery is to some degree sulfated but it has nothing to do with negative energy IMO. Its caused as a result of internal impedance changes in the battery. The rise in voltage can continue for a considerable time even on heavy discharges but this effect certainly does not result in more out than in from the many load tests that I have carried out to study this effect.

My batteries are well conditioned deep discharge golf cart types and I've never seen more out than in from them. The batteries will improve in capacity as high voltage, low current pulse conditioning progresses but again this has nothing to do with negative energy IMO and is as a result of the battery plates being progressively cleared of sulfate deposits, thus providing more plate area for charge retention.

Hoppy

[patmac]

Everyone

Many months ago, I found this schematic on peswiki, I can't found the page link again, if somebody find the link please post because the schematic is cortesy from his editor.

This schematic on peswiki page claims OU by selfrunner, use diodos on each coil to recover the energy and send it on the battery, energy created by magnetic field and rotor.

I would like try it. I've a dvd burner damaged this is a easy way to get a high eff rotor with cd. Transistor maybe TIP41C (BD243C), can works well.

[Hoppy]

Many months ago, I found this schematic on peswiki, I can't found the page link again, if somebody find the link please post because the schematic is cortesy from his editor.

This schematic on peswiki page claims OU by selfrunner, use diodos on each coil to recover the energy and send it on the battery, energy created by magnetic field and rotor.

I would like try it. I've a dvd burner damaged this is a easy way to get a high eff rotor with cd. Transistor maybe TIP41C (BD243C), can works well.

This is one of a number of SG solid state variant designs from a guy named 'Marcus'. John Bedini tested some of his design's and if I recall correctly, he found them not to be OU.

Hoppy

[redeagle]

I have brought back to life many car batteries and have a sg that runs on very little input and all of that is great. But I got into this free energy device building to make a machine that would charge 9 batteries from the input of 1 like was shown on the icehouse web site or build a self runner. Unfortunetly I have yet to make a 1 to 1 charger or self runner. I do believe it is possible but not with the information that we have. I hope that ALL the information that is need to do either will be available soon! Or that someone will figure it out and share it with the rest of us.

So I say good luck to all and keep up the hard work. I try to look at all this as a fun and exciting hobbie and try not to get my hopes up too high and keep on learning.

Mark

Any hope of creating a 1-1 charge or a self runner is by using a motorized system and tapping 99+% of the mechanical energy. By studying the self runner threads you learn that the people that were able to create a self runner flat out destroyed the running battery. The only way I believe to have a true self runner is to have an environmental input. Much like the Kromrey converter is claimed to be.

If you have a powerful enough bedini and a working kromrey converter driven by it you have have a very powerful generation system. Another thing is that we do now know what condition Bedini's batteries were in when he did his tests. Were they "negatively" conditioned, new, or heavily sulphated.

The part i have problems with about the SG are the claims of the strong spike being negative energy. There is little documentation to support the theory yet convential science explains it very well. Electromagnetic inductance: A changing magnetic field induces an electric current into a wire and vice versa. The faster the collapse of the magnetic field the higher the voltage goes. Because the spike is cause by the collapse of the EM not the field from the rotor it collapses in milli seconds. Collecting the current of that collapse forces the field to collapse faster.

[Sephiroth]

40%??? that is a very low estimate!

If any of my devices are less than COP 0.7 (when just looking at the batteries) I would consider there to be something wrong with them.

COP 0.85 has been achieved (again, just looking at the charging batteries)

I believe the principle behind JBs circuits can probably reach COP > 1. The main problem (i believe) is scale and proper method. I don't believe a simple bifilar coil could reach COP > 1 because the resistance is too high. Eliminate the losses in the circuit and the gains become more apparent.

Also, rigorous cycling is needed, which I know many here have tried, though I have been studying the conditioning effect for some time now and there is definatly something going on there.

@redeagle

the spike is a bit more complicated I'm afraid. The field (on the whole) collapses just a little bit faster than it was formed because the current generated by the flyback sustains the magnetic field. I think of it a bit like a parachute on a skydiver. Though there is a split second a "free fall" before the current (parachute) kicks in this free fall seems to be alot like Tesla's radiant energy as it is described in "Secrets of Cold War Technology"

[Naboo]

40%??? that is a very low estimate!

If any of my devices are less than COP 0.7 (when just looking at the batteries) I would consider there to be something wrong with them.

COP 0.85 has been achieved (again, just looking at the charging batteries)

I believe the principle behind JBs circuits can probably reach COP > 1. The main problem (i believe) is scale and proper method. I don't believe a simple bifilar coil could reach COP > 1 because the resistance is too high. Eliminate the losses in the circuit and the gains become more apparent.

Also, rigorous cycling is needed, which I know many here have tried, though I have been studying the conditioning effect for some time now and there is definatly something going on there.

@redeagle

the spike is a bit more complicated I'm afraid. The field (on the whole) collapses just a little bit faster than it was formed because the current generated by the flyback sustains the magnetic field. I think of it a bit like a parachute on a skydiver. Though there is a split second a "free fall" before the current (parachute) kicks in this free fall seems to be alot like Tesla's radiant energy as it is described in "Secrets of Cold War Technology"

I totally agree Sephiroth, if anybody wants to know exactly where the "magic" in this circuit is happening, look at the abruptness in the transistor on-off cycle.
Ideally transistors is not the best way to do it, they can't handle enough current or voltage and can neither compete with the ultrafast switching of a magnetically quenched spark gap.
However they are fast enough to create the effect which by many has been termed "cold electricity", because of the very special characteristics it possess.

You could ask "why is a sharp gradient of any significance, other than focusing energy to create lots of power in an instance?".

Because that sudden abruptness of power allows even the inertia stored in an electron to lag it behind, making the true ambient potential which charge really is possible to control.
Tesla described it as a gas which Bedini also agrees with. Tesla conducted several experiments with his "disruptor" where he could visibly and physically prove that he was not using ordinary electron current, but something much more lighter and smaller.


Something which several independent scientist including A. Frolov is saying, is that all that is necessary to generate energy and reactionless propulsion for no cost what so ever is to tap the time and space energy-exchange, which can only be done by creating asymmetry.
The end conclusion is: Energy, matter and information is the same.

Bye all,
Julian